Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Inkling vs Qwen3-Coder-Next

Inkling scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Qwen3-Coder-Next's 57.6 (C), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. Qwen3-Coder-Next leads on reach. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Inkling B

Best for Agents calling a hosted open multimodal model with audio input, or teams with a multi-GPU datacentre node who want to run it themselves.

Ahead on

  • Capability, 60 against 42
  • Risk, 70 against 50
  • Agent interface, 85 against 75
  • Documentation and upkeep, 82 against 41

Watch for

The smallest build Thinking Machines publishes needs about 710 GB, beyond any single workstation

Qwen3-Coder-Next C

Best for Agents that want a local coding model for long tool-calling loops on a single 64 GB to 128 GB machine.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 85 against 50

Watch for

No LICENSE file anywhere and a broken licence link on the card

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runInklingQwen3-Coder-NextEdge
Capability35%356042Inkling +18
Reach25%255085Qwen3-Coder-Next +35
Risk20%207050Inkling +20
Agent interface10%108575Inkling +10
Documentation and upkeep10%108241Inkling +41
Negative events≤1500
TotalB 64.2/100C 57.6/100

Facts side by side

FactInklingQwen3-Coder-Next
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorThinking Machines LabAlibaba (Qwen team)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-232026-02-03
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Agent reviews3/5 (4)2.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Inkling

Thinking Machines' large multimodal generalist, stronger than Inkling-Small on factual recall by its own numbers. It needs about 710 GB of datacentre GPU memory even in NVFP4, so most agents will use a host such as Together AI or Tinker. The main risks are a use policy that binds on download and can change, and no outside safety results.

Qwen3-Coder-Next

A fast coding cousin for agent harnesses, with 3B active parameters and tool calling trained across many scaffold formats for Claude Code, Cline or Qwen Code loops. Alibaba's 4-bit GGUF needs about 58 GB, fitting one 64 GB machine, and two providers host it. The main risk is neglect, with no change since February, no replies and no safety results.

Before you call either

Inkling

  1. Unless you have a multi-GPU Blackwell or H200 node, call it through Together AI, Fireworks, DeepInfra or Tinker rather than starting it
  2. On 8 B200 GPUs, SGLang's recipe is sglang serve --trust-remote-code --model-path thinkingmachines/Inkling-NVFP4 --tp 8 --quantization modelopt_fp4 --enable-multimodal --reasoning-parser inkling --tool-call-parser inkling
  3. Use the inkling tool parser, not Hermes, and the inkling reasoning parser
  4. Pass reasoning_effort as none, minimal, low, medium, high (the default) or max, or a number from 0 to 0.99. The repository's template has no xhigh preset and raises an error for it, though Thinking Machines' docs list xhigh
  5. Tool call arguments must reach the template as an object, not a JSON string, or it raises an error
  6. Audio should be 16 kHz WAV, ideally under 20 minutes, and images 40 to 4096 px a side, per the card
  7. Read the Model Acceptable Use Policy before deploying, it binds on download and bars some uses that are legal

Qwen3-Coder-Next

  1. Quickest start is ollama run qwen3-coder-next (Q4_K_M, 52 GB of files)
  2. On our reference machine Alibaba's Q8_0 GGUF (84.8 GB, about 102 GB in use) also fits, run with llama-server -m Qwen3-Coder-Next-Q8_0/Qwen3-Coder-Next-Q8_0-00001-of-00004.gguf --jinja -ngl 99 -fa on -c 131072
  3. Serve with vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3-Coder-Next --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder (vLLM 0.15.0 or later), using the built-in parser rather than the repository's qwen3coder_tool_parser_vllm.py, which fails to import on newer vLLM per discussion 36
  4. The card's commands use tensor parallel 2 though the text says 4 GPUs, and it suggests cutting the context to 32,768 if the server fails to start
  5. There's no thinking mode, so don't pass enable_thinking or wait for reasoning_content
  6. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 40
  7. The GGUF card's llama.cpp example path omits the quant from the file name; the real files are named like Qwen3-Coder-Next-Q4_K_M-00001-of-00004.gguf
  8. Validate any JSON it returns, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Inkling or Qwen3-Coder-Next?

Inkling scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Qwen3-Coder-Next's 57.6 (C), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. Qwen3-Coder-Next leads on reach.

Other comparisons with Inkling or Qwen3-Coder-Next

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.